I'd read about things like this on the intertubes, but never expected it would actually happen to us. We were wandering around the town centre of XXX at the weekend, and walked into a shopping centre/mall. Jules had her camera and decided to take a picture (she's keen on that, you may have noticed). Shortly after completing the snap, a security guard came up and told us we weren't allowed to do that. Why not, Jules asked (not being in Japan any more). "Health and safety of the buildings" he replied. We laughed and told him that was obviously rubbish, and then he said it was because of security. After all, any self-respecting thief will take pictures from the outside of the shop with a big fat DSLR in full view of the CCTV systems, rather than surreptitiously take snaps with a phone or concealed camera...
I assumed at the time that as shopping centres are generally private land, the owners do actually have the right to forbid photography (technically, they do this by withdrawing the implied permission of access, making the photographer a trespasser). So I didn't argue any further. However, I have now seen that although it's not actually a public right of way, there used to be one there before the mall was built, and there is some sort of bylaw guaranteeing public access during daytime, with provisions for public order and obstruction but nothing relating to photography being banned. So now I'm disappointed I didn't stand up for my rights.
I assumed at the time that as shopping centres are generally private land, the owners do actually have the right to forbid photography (technically, they do this by withdrawing the implied permission of access, making the photographer a trespasser). So I didn't argue any further. However, I have now seen that although it's not actually a public right of way, there used to be one there before the mall was built, and there is some sort of bylaw guaranteeing public access during daytime, with provisions for public order and obstruction but nothing relating to photography being banned. So now I'm disappointed I didn't stand up for my rights.
7 comments:
By god, stand up for your rights.
This is of course why h&S gets a bad name, with it being misused as an excuse.
If you read up on it, I'm pretty sure there's no way they can stop you taking photos in a public place, I just can'[t recall if a shopping mall counts as a public place, although as you say if a right of way exists then I'm pretty sure you have a case.
Anything else you notice that is different since you were last here? There'll be more tescos and suchlike, but I can';t think of any major changes in the last 10 years, the americanisation ofthe UK was well under way by then.
(By americanisation I mean malls, cameras, advertising everywhere, increasing gap between rich and poor etc)
There's been quite a few instances of this recently in the UK where police have been trying to use anti-terrorism laws to curtail photography in public places. And don't take a photo of a policeman or of serving or non-serving military and intelligence personnel! At least not without their permission.
See this YouTube video and this lens cloth.
You might also like to consult the pdf "The UK Photographers Rights Guide v2" linked to on this page.
Thanks for the comments. The really annoying thing is, I knew all that stuff, and I know that in public places, we can basically photograph anything we want. But at the time I thought that since we were on private property, we would not have this freedom.
I'm still surprised it actually happened to us, though. I had assumed it was an occasional problem not a ubiquitous one. I'll be around here for some time and may go back with a camera just for laughs...
Phone camera? I thought terrorist pictures were more recherché than that.
Cambridge Lion Yard, and now the Grand Arcade? The Labour council sold us out on the original right of way, back in the mid 90s. The non-Labour council sold us out some more on the Grand Arcade.
A friend has been barred from there for singing.
Rumbled! Was the Lion Yard. Not that I really want to go back there - it seemed a rather mediocre place.
Post a Comment